LCGB - BLOA - Concessionaires......confusion

[GTFOMWSC]

Wasn’t Martin Frankland the geezer who played “Tim” in the Office?

nope that was Martin Freeman a hilarious bloke tbh

[mick1]

Wasn’t Martin Frankland the geezer who played “Tim” in the Office?

nope that was Martin Freeman a hilarious bloke tbh

Isn't that the black bloke in the Shawshank Redemption

[hendy]

I went to school with Frank Martinland, a very studious youth who moved to Iceland to study swallow migration.

I didn't realise that swallows migrated so far North. Or is it simply that was where the academic centre for the study was based?

[drunkmunkey6969]

I went to school with Frank Martinland, a very studious youth who moved to Iceland to study swallow migration.

I didn't realise that swallows migrated so far North. Or is it simply that was where the academic centre for the study was based?

He means the frozen food store...

[GTFOMWSC]

Wasn’t Martin Frankland the geezer who played “Tim” in the Office?

nope that was Martin Freeman a hilarious bloke tbh

Isn't that the black bloke in the Shawshank Redemption

LOL nah that's Morgan Freeman good film though

[Sach]

Does Morgan Freeman own the name BLOA?

[mick1]

Does Morgan Freeman own the name BLOA?

It's looking that way

There's a rumour he could be fronting it for VCB

[hendy]

I went to school with Frank Martinland, a very studious youth who moved to Iceland to study swallow migration.

I didn't realise that swallows migrated so far North. Or is it simply that was where the academic centre for the study was based?

He means the frozen food store...

I once ate dog in korea but never swallowed as it was disgusting.

[Nic]

Not sure who is wrong or who is right and personally don't care a jot,but one thing i wonder is IF the LCGB are adamant they are right and have no fear about losing and prepared to spend it's members money on it(i am not and never will be so don't care if they spend the money) what happens if they lose?.Will the junta fall on it's sword and offer all their resignations? somehow i wouldn't think so, what would it's members attitude then be?.

It's hyperthetical as no decision has been made but there has to be an outcome where there is a winner and loser.I can only summise that the LCGB have been lapse if anything in not protecting it's ownership of names etc etc as like the example with slazenger and the likes where that sporting company bought them all up and then proceeded to make garments with their logo/names on.Think this might be a similar situation of sorts and has to go the legal route to clarify ownership.

One thing very noticable is the fact that a lot of riders who don't want to be part of the LCGB have registered interest in this new BLOA and quite considerable numbers since all this blew up.I registered interest myself as i want nothing to do with the LCGB never have since the 80's same with VCB as i own vespas as well so it's not just a lammy biase thing.I'm going to the Sywell rally to check it out.

I'll make it clear i'm not siding with either party on this but it is a wake up call to the LCGB that not everyone is with them and there are more lambretta owners not in it than are.

I don't think it's a case of the LCGB committee falling on their swords if the legal case doesn't pan out. From what I've been told, the vote at the AGM in favour was unanimous. The committee has undertaken to keep members informed of what is happening and if it is ever felt that it's time to stop the legal battle, I trust them to tell me.

Personally, I've been a member of the LCGB for more than 20 years and back the AGM decision 100% to fight to retain the BLOA name as part of the LCGB's link with its own 65-year history. I'd rather the LCGB didn't spend its funds to do so, but I believe this is a point of principle for the Club.

Almost anyone with the slightest knowledge or interest in scootering tradition in the UK knows that the BLOA name is part of a continuous connection that runs from 1953, through to the LCGB formed by Bob Wilkinson in 1965, to the reformed Club which was brought out of mothballs by Kev Walsh and the Widnes Saints in the late 1970s.

The LCGB has written evidence that Mike Karslake, the man who actually designed the BLOA logo and other Club material in the 1950s and was instrumental in agreeing that the Club should be revived in the 1970s, assigned the copyright to use his designs to the reformed LCGB - while also insisting that LCGB officials are required ensure that his copyrighted designs are NOT used to the clubs' detriment, financially or otherwise.

Which is why, personally, I think that to talk about "protecting ownership of names" is to miss the point. There is no doubt that the moral owners of the BLOA name are the LCGB.

Should the LGCG have registered the name to stop someone from sneaking in and trying to snatch it under its nose? Perhaps they should, who knows? My guess is the committee assumed no-one who has the slightest respect for scootering history in this country would try do something like this.

If we're being honest, most of us wouldn't have thought so either. As someone who bought his first scoter in 1979 and his first Lambretta in 1982, one of the things I love about scootering is that the vast majority of people are straight. I've lost count of the number of times that people have helped me out in all sorts of ways and I'd like to think I've done the same in return a few times.

We want to believe the best of people in our scootering community. We assume people will play fair and not show total disrespect or try to play legalistic games for their own narrow financial ends. Is it naive to think this way? Maybe it is. But if it is, it's a sad day for scootering.

As an LCGB member, I'm totally aware that even though the Club I'm proud to belong to has more than 5,000 members, there are many other Lambretta owners who choose not to belong. I respect that 100%.

If someone wants to form another Club which they feel will better represent their interests or earn them some money, that's their free choice. If they want to make a few quid online by selling stuff to punters on eBay, that's fine too.

All I and many hundreds of active and long-standing LCGB members - and thousands who are less active but just as loyal to the Club's traditions - ask is that you respect our history and don't try to grab part it to make money off our backs. I'd like to think that anyone - even those who choose not to be in the LCGB - will support that view.

[GTFOMWSC]

Not sure who is wrong or who is right and personally don't care a jot,but one thing i wonder is IF the LCGB are adamant they are right and have no fear about losing and prepared to spend it's members money on it(i am not and never will be so don't care if they spend the money) what happens if they lose?.Will the junta fall on it's sword and offer all their resignations? somehow i wouldn't think so, what would it's members attitude then be?.

It's hyperthetical as no decision has been made but there has to be an outcome where there is a winner and loser.I can only summise that the LCGB have been lapse if anything in not protecting it's ownership of names etc etc as like the example with slazenger and the likes where that sporting company bought them all up and then proceeded to make garments with their logo/names on.Think this might be a similar situation of sorts and has to go the legal route to clarify ownership.

One thing very noticable is the fact that a lot of riders who don't want to be part of the LCGB have registered interest in this new BLOA and quite considerable numbers since all this blew up.I registered interest myself as i want nothing to do with the LCGB never have since the 80's same with VCB as i own vespas as well so it's not just a lammy biase thing.I'm going to the Sywell rally to check it out.

I'll make it clear i'm not siding with either party on this but it is a wake up call to the LCGB that not everyone is with them and there are more lambretta owners not in it than are.

I don't think it's a case of the LCGB committee falling on their swords if the legal case doesn't pan out. From what I've been told, the vote at the AGM in favour was unanimous. The committee has undertaken to keep members informed of what is happening and if it is ever felt that it's time to stop the legal battle, I trust them to tell me.

Personally, I've been a member of the LCGB for more than 20 years and back the AGM decision 100% to fight to retain the BLOA name as part of the LCGB's link with its own 65-year history. I'd rather the LCGB didn't spend its funds to do so, but I believe this is a point of principle for the Club.

Almost anyone with the slightest knowledge or interest in scootering tradition in the UK knows that the BLOA name is part of a continuous connection that runs from 1953, through to the LCGB formed by Bob Wilkinson in 1965, to the reformed Club which was brought out of mothballs by Kev Walsh and the Widnes Saints in the late 1970s.

The LCGB has written evidence that Mike Karslake, the man who actually designed the BLOA logo and other Club material in the 1950s and was instrumental in agreeing that the Club should be revived in the 1970s, assigned the copyright to use his designs to the reformed LCGB - while also insisting that LCGB officials are required ensure that his copyrighted designs are NOT used to the clubs' detriment, financially or otherwise.

Which is why, personally, I think that to talk about "protecting ownership of names" is to miss the point. There is no doubt that the moral owners of the BLOA name are the LCGB.

Should the LGCG have registered the name to stop someone from sneaking in and trying to snatch it under its nose? Perhaps they should, who knows? My guess is the committee assumed no-one who has the slightest respect for scootering history in this country would try do something like this.

If we're being honest, most of us wouldn't have thought so either. As someone who bought his first scoter in 1979 and his first Lambretta in 1982, one of the things I love about scootering is that the vast majority of people are straight. I've lost count of the number of times that people have helped me out in all sorts of ways and I'd like to think I've done the same in return a few times.

We want to believe the best of people in our scootering community. We assume people will play fair and not show total disrespect or try to play legalistic games for their own narrow financial ends. Is it naive to think this way? Maybe it is. But if it is, it's a sad day for scootering.

As an LCGB member, I'm totally aware that even though the Club I'm proud to belong to has more than 5,000 members, there are many other Lambretta owners who choose not to belong. I respect that 100%.

If someone wants to form another Club which they feel will better represent their interests or earn them some money, that's their free choice. If they want to make a few quid online by selling stuff to punters on eBay, that's fine too.

All I and many hundreds of active and long-standing LCGB members - and thousands who are less active but just as loyal to the Club's traditions - ask is that you respect our history and don't try to grab part it to make money off our backs. I'd like to think that anyone - even those who choose not to be in the LCGB - will support that view.

Interesting you say they get full support, from who? the 400 who turned up out of your 5000 that is just under 10% of the members being able to vote. Was there an option for a postal vote by any chance on any issues? maybe if there was a lot more members who can't really justify a jolly to Yorkshire would have taken that option and it could of then gone the other way.

I don't care for the LCGB as i have said but there stance is on usage obviously by the sounds of it. They've been lapse, it doesn't matter a bit if someone says i created said logo or not it's wether its been used in any form for a certain amount of time and the registery kept upto date.Certainly no expert but i have dealt with this with my job and it can be a grey area(oh and we lost but not in the same posability as here)so you can lose it and it could be they have to prove usage of it in that time span and that was why i thought it was strange to see the banner suddenly incorperate the BLOA on it this year.


It's not always about fair play tbh and where does it say that the BLOA new owner is out to make money off everyone i don't see any proof of that at all, all i see is he is putting on events that he is spending his own money funding currently. Yes he is charging for tickets but so do the LCGB so why is that differentI'll say though that if the LCGB do lose then ALL of it's members not just the 400 should have a say in wether they go or not as it is their money they have spent.TBH all this comittee crap only reminds me of a bygone era of the wheeltappers and shunters type stuff and really should be kicked into touch but old fashioned is old fashioned i suppose,well i do own 13 lambrettas so definately can be classed as both old and old fashioned.

Let's just hope it gets resolved asap and everyone moves on imho